Self defense and "you can't hit a girl"
page 3

I am not in any hurry to start throwing uppercuts to women so that i am not called a chauvinist by some people for reasons only known to them.

You’re being called a chauvinist because you are one. I don’t think Jantonaitis or anyone else need any further reasons.

So, the day has come when a man who says that he wouldn’t hit a woman under any circumstance is called a chauvinist for it. Talk about your moral decay right there.

I think your “hyperbole-speak” there is where ya kinda have missed the point.
Let’s not get silly on this….violence of any kind WHOMEVER initiates it and recieves it should be discussed w/o getting out-of-the-realm-of-reason.

Tell me, Dante, do you think morality goes hand-in-hand with rationalism? Or do you think that there are all sorts of morals that are fundamentally irrational, actions that people take for no other reason than they feel it’s the right thing to do?

Religious people believe in the latter. Now, I know you don’t think much of religion, so I would have to assume you believe the former is true: what is moral is what is logical – the Kantian imperative. You and I both know that the basis for one’s ‘feelings’ is more often than not conditioned behavior brought on by a certain cultural or temporal-spatial context. Capital punishment ‘feels right’ in Islamic orthodoxy, or in parts of the US, or in France until 1977. Take those conditions away and it no longer ‘feels right’, either because we’ve been socialized against (more cultural conditioning) or because we argue that the ‘eye for an eye’ tribal mentality is irrational…killing the criminal won’t reverse the damage done.

Tell me, Dante, do you think there is any circumstance that would justify hitting a child? What about a cripple? What about an elderly person (since Karma is here I’ll restrict elderly to refer only to those who are unable to take a punch without suffering serious damage)? What about a pregnant woman? What about the seriously ill?

Each of these groups of people have one thing in common: they are, in some way, vulnerable. They are not the physical equal of the average person.

Now when you place the entire grouping of women, no qualifications, alongside these groups, you are sending a message: Women are weak, women are vulnerable, and no woman is my physical equal.

This sort of thinking is why women are not permitted to take active combat roles in the US military, among other backwards countries of course. This sort of thinking gives ammunition to radical men’s groups who argue that woman on man domestic violence is ignored because women can’t possibly threaten a man. It also undermines the feminists who are nowadays seen by many people as trying to take on more rights than mere gender-equality, when what they are actually trying to do is gain social equality by overcoming this sort of chauvinist nonsense. Yes, it is chauvinist. A woman is not a child, and arguing otherwise in the name of ‘morals’ is fundamentally immoral. It takes away her dignity as an adult responsible for her own decisions, placing her lower compared to a man.

That being said,

violence of any kind WHOMEVER initiates it and recieves it should be discussed w/o getting out-of-the-realm-of-reason.

Exactly. I don’t go around getting into fights with guys. I avoid them. The opposite of treating women as weaker than men isn’t to beat them up; unless you’re a thug, the logic is patently fallacious. If discussion is impossible then I try to disable a man without causing him too much damage. I apply the same reasoning to women. Doing anything else would be irrational.

“You can’t hit a girl” is an inherently chauvinist remark and defense. Both when the phrase or attitude is employed by men and women, it is sexist towards both genders. What many people fail to realise is “you can’t hit a girl” is sexist towards women as it puts them below men, implying that they’re delicate, not to be touched, and fragile. Women aren’t like that, and women who use “you can’t hit a girl” and consequently are being sexist against their own gender piss me off.

If someone’s attacking you, defend yourself. Regardless of the attacker’s gender. It is purely sexist to change one’s attitude as a result of the attacker’s gender, it is near the literal definition of the word sexist: (1) “unfair treatment or discrimination based on a difference of sex or gender”; (2) “the belief that people of one sex or gender are inherently superior to people of the other sex or gender”.

Stop looking at people’s genders, and treat people equally; whether they’re being violent towards you or having a mere conversation with you, don’t treat differently people because of their gender.

So, if you won’t lay a hand on a woman, Dante, what is your reaction when you come across a woman kicking the shit out of some stranger on a street corner? He’s already quite bloody, and she shows no sign of stopping anytime soon. Do you cheerfully walk on by, and catch news of a murder in the paper the next day? Do you phone the cops, and then take up a position a distance away as you refuse to lay a finger on a female whilst she continues to make his bones crunch as her foot collides with them again and again?

So, if you won’t lay a hand on a woman, Dante, what is your reaction when you come across a woman kicking the shit out of some stranger on a street corner? He’s already quite bloody, and she shows no sign of stopping anytime soon. Do you cheerfully walk on by, and catch news of a murder in the paper the next day? Do you phone the cops, and then take up a position a distance away as you refuse to lay a finger on a female whilst she continues to make his bones crunch as her foot collides with them again and again?

What would your old-fashioned values have you do?

I would be like. “You want to be treated as equals to men? Then so be it!” Then I will tackle her an try to break her face and treat her as if she was the manliest man ever.

So, if you won’t lay a hand on a woman, Dante, what is your reaction when you come across a woman kicking the shit out of some stranger on a street corner? He’s already quite bloody, and she shows no sign of stopping anytime soon. Do you cheerfully walk on by, and catch news of a murder in the paper the next day? Do you phone the cops, and then take up a position a distance away as you refuse to lay a finger on a female whilst she continues to make his bones crunch as her foot collides with them again and again?

What would your old-fashioned values have you do?

I would be like. “You want to be treated as equals to men? Then so be it!” Then I will tackle her an try to break her face and treat her as if she was the manliest man ever.

Still, whether the head of that embarrassing church is a man or a woman doesn’t really make a difference.

Correct. They ought to be murdered regardless of gender.

and stuck my ba-ba-balls of steel,

Leave that shit in Off-Topic, thank you. This is Serious Discussion.

Whaat? I was just giving her equal rights, is she wants to be treated like a man, then she will be treated like a man.

Your whole reasoning was non-sexist until what tenco quoted. You’re saying a woman is ‘stupid’ for beating up a man. You probably wouldn’t say a man is stupid for beating up a man. Thus, you’re being sexist as you’re changing your mind on this on the basis of one’s sex.

I never heard of that church.

You’ve never heard of the Westboro Baptist Church? Wow. That’s pretty ignorant… Educate yourself. Go to YouTube, go to Wikipedia. Watch the news for once. They’re constantly there, especially on the former two.

Hey, do you like games? So do we — that’s what makes Kongregate the best source of free games online. We have thousands upon thousands of free online games, from both one-man indies and large studios, rated and filtered so you can play the best of the best. Read more »